- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The Scientific Establishment Is Finally Starting To Take Intelligent Design Seriously
Posted on 5/20/22 at 10:04 am to BamaAtl
Posted on 5/20/22 at 10:04 am to BamaAtl
quote:
Where do you want to move the goal posts to now?
Perhaps to the article you intended?
Your link (at least for me) is to a New Yorker article about Richard Dawkins' "eyes", but does not provide the explanation you suggest. The video with it is 2 folks going through a crossword puzzle.
0
Posted on 5/20/22 at 10:07 am to MNCTigah
quote:Clearly.
I don't know what you're arguing with your response.
What you "don't know" is obvious when, for example, you conclude intelligent design is not intelligent design. Worse, you do so by citing a wikipedia piece referring to a scientific theist, while simultaneously claiming ID as pseudoscience.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 10:08 am
Posted on 5/20/22 at 11:37 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
What you "don't know" is obvious when, for example, you conclude intelligent design is not intelligent design.
You can argue CRISPR, or gene splicing by advanced aliens and play semantics with the terminology. But that's not what ID is.
quote:
Worse, you do so by citing a wikipedia piece referring to a scientific theist, while simultaneously claiming ID as pseudoscience.
Dembski? He's a theologian. Phillip Johnson is the originator, but Dembski ardently promoted and shares credit. I have another Wikipedia for you. Theistic Science. Yet another pseudoscientific proposal.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 12:04 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:07 pm to aubie101
I guarantee you that article is fully misrepresenting either the basis of the conference or what was said at the conference or both. 
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:10 pm to TrussvilleTide
Einstein while not have believed in God of the Bible, still believed in a intelligent designer.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:14 pm to MNCTigah
quote:
I have another Wikipedia for you
Why not just reference Snopes?
Nobody who wants to have a serious discussion about this should be referencing Wikipedia any more than they should Ken Ham.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:16 pm to MNCTigah
quote:MNCTigah, the terminology is straightforward. Your understanding of it isn't. In this forum, a mediocre knowledgebase combined with a desire to pigeonhole and castigate others won't serve you well.
You can argue CRISPR, or gene splicing by advanced aliens and play semantics with the terminology.
But that's not what ID is.
quote:Got it?
Aliens, the Multiverse, or God?
Stephen C. Meyer
December 20, 2021
Does a design require a designer?
Keep that question in mind as we look at some new scientific discoveries about the origin of life and the universe.
Since Charles Darwin published his theory of evolution in 1859, many scientists have denied that design requires a designer. Darwinists have long claimed the mechanism of natural selection could generate the appearance or “illusion” of design without being directed or guided in any way.
Recently, however, even staunch Darwinists have acknowledged that living things may have certain features that display evidence of actual intelligent design — though their ideas about who designed life on earth are, well, a bit out there.
Some prominent scientists have proposed that space aliens designed and then transported life to Earth. Evolutionary biologist and noted atheist Richard Dawkins has even floated this idea, suggesting that extraterrestrials may be responsible for a possible “signature of intelligence” in life.
Indeed, no less a scientific genius than Francis Crick, who helped discover DNA, also proposed the idea that ET’s seeded life on earth to set the evolutionary process in motion.
...
…. which kind of suggests a master programmer.
Could such an intelligent designer have been an alien as Crick and Dawkins have suggested?
LINK
In short, you and the uninformed author(s) of your Wikipedia piece conflate “Intelligent Design” with “Theistic Evolution”.
When you find yourself calling postulates of Francis Crick and Richard Dawkins "pseudoscience", at the same time you claim Homo sapiens evolved from Bonobos, you should take another look at what it is you think you know. The self-examination might not be pretty. But it would be healthy.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 12:38 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:18 pm to TrussvilleTide
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 12:18 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:18 pm to aubie101
I believe in intelligent design but also believe that any intelligent design that moves to D.C. unfortunately becomes Satan's children who tend to stay in D.C. for 40-50 years too long
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:40 pm to hubertcumberdale
Are you basing this on carbon dating? You would be more accurate throwing a dart at a board with numbers on it. Everything releases carbon at different rates.
And I was basing my count on the Bible, yes. As a Christian I base most things I rely on to be true on the Bible which doesn't change based on the political winds of the times, like today's "science".
And I was basing my count on the Bible, yes. As a Christian I base most things I rely on to be true on the Bible which doesn't change based on the political winds of the times, like today's "science".
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 12:43 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:45 pm to hubertcumberdale
(no message)
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 12:47 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 12:46 pm to hubertcumberdale
quote:
hubertcumberdale
What are these nonsensical cartoons you are spewing? I can draw up some pictures, put some lies in it, and pass it off as fact too.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 1:20 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
In short, you and the uninformed author(s) of your Wikipedia piece conflate “Intelligent Design” with “Theistic Evolution”.
Intelligent Design was a cover for injecting creationism into US public schools after courts deemed such curriculum religious in nature and not fit for a science class.
You linked Stephen C. Meyer from the Discovery Institute. Could you have chosen an individual and organization more connected to attempting to backdoor theistic creationism into public schools?
Posted on 5/20/22 at 1:47 pm to Herooftheday
quote:Maybe so, but it sounds a whole lot more like the claims of James Ussher than of the Bible itself.
And I was basing my count on the Bible
Regarding the fossil record, let's not even address geophysical and/or carbon dating. Let's simply assume relative dating.
Relative dating identifies only sequences as one relates to the other rather than a timeframe. For example, you may have heard of the KT line? The KT line is a dark thin line formed from debris after a massive asteroid impact. It is seen in strata all over the planet. Some types of fossils only appear deep to the KT line. Others only appear at levels above it.
So we know for example there was a large collection of animals predating dinosaurs. We know dinosaurs were entirely killed off with the KT event. Subsequently there was a period of Great Mammals. Giant sloths, Sabre-toothed cats, Mammoths, etc., all long extinct.
Meanwhile, written history takes us back about 5000yrs. No discussion of megamammals in early writings. Certainly no discussion of dinosaurs.
How do you account for that?
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 1:49 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 1:47 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Some prominent scientists have proposed that space aliens designed and then transported life to Earth. Evolutionary biologist and noted atheist Richard Dawkins has even floated this idea, suggesting that extraterrestrials may be responsible for a possible “signature of intelligence” in life.
bullshite from the intelligent designer crew. Dawkins was asked a question, in about 2012, supposing intelligent design occurred, how might it have happened and he gave a response about alien seeding. Interviewer was Ben stein and now it’s being misrepresented by the usual suspects. Here’s him referencing it in 2019: LINK
This is always the case with these dumb designer claims.
This post was edited on 5/20/22 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 5/20/22 at 1:53 pm to Flats
quote:
Nobody who wants to have a serious discussion about this should be referencing Wikipedia any more than they should Ken Ham.
The argument has been what constitutes the definition of intelligent design. Referencing Wikipedia is overkill. We all know what the definition is.
You can nitpick the reference and continue be disingenuous by trying to convolute a simplistic definition. Just tells me that you don't have much to respond with.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 2:02 pm to cwill
quote:No. Sorry. That is EXACTLY what Dawkins floated as an idea. Whether he was serious, or how serious he was isn't terribly important to me.
bullshite from the intelligent designer crew
What is relevant to the discussion you're inserting yourself into, and the reason I brought Dawkins into the discussion, is his repeated use of the term "intelligent design", obviously (given Dawkins' fervent atheism) with no intent to reference God.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 2:05 pm to Herooftheday
quote:
Are you basing this on carbon dating?
Radiometric dating is a much larger field than just carbon dating.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 2:15 pm to BamaAtl
Good lord at this thread. What a fricking shitshow.
Posted on 5/20/22 at 2:18 pm to MNCTigah
quote:It's not nitpicking anymore than it's nitpicking to point out that man did not evolve from bonobos. You should restart with a conspectus before attempting details.
You can nitpick the reference
Page 12 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News